Agriculture: Animal Health

Lord Hunt of Kings Heath: My right honourable friend the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Hilary Benn) has made the following Written Ministerial Statement.
	I am today announcing publication of a consultation document inviting views on the Government's proposals to establish a new independent body for animal health in England.
	No one wants animal disease outbreaks, with the resultant suffering or even death of the animals affected and the lost production and income for their owners. Some animal diseases can also pose a threat to public health.
	Owners and keepers of animals have the primary responsibility for the health of their own animals and preventing the risk of any diseases they incur spreading to other animals or into the food chain. But preventing, controlling and eradicating some diseases often requires government action which can disrupt normal business (particularly in the livestock sector) and interfere with people's everyday lives. These measures can be costly for the Government to implement and costly to those affected. They are justified by the benefit of avoiding the greater impact and costs from the diseases themselves.
	Some of these benefits are gained by taxpayers generally (through protection of public health). But in many cases (such as foot and mouth disease or bluetongue) the main benefits are to the owners of the livestock who might otherwise become infected.
	Much of the livestock industry has called publicly for changes in the way animal health policies are determined. The Government have been discussing many of these issues with industry since Sir Iain Anderson's inquiry into the foot and mouth outbreak in 2001. Following the Government's consultation document published in December 2007, policy options have been discussed with stakeholders and in the UK Responsibility and Cost Sharing Consultative Forum, which concluded its deliberations in July this year. These proposals build on the outcomes of this engagement with stakeholders and have benefited from the constructive challenge of the England Implementation Group.
	The Government are seeking views on two fundamental changes to modernise the governance and funding of animal health policy: first, the establishment of a separate body for animal health in England run by an independent non-executive board including knowledge and experience from across the spectrum of interests in animal health; and secondly, a levy raised from livestock keepers according to the numbers and type of animals kept.
	The proposed new body will provide greater transparency in decision-making and increase confidence in the resultant policies. The body will continue to receive public funding for the bulk of its activities. The levy will be used to contribute to the costs of preparing for, and dealing with, exotic disease outbreaks. Those who gain from the eradication of these diseases will help pay for the costs of doing so, as Sir Iain Anderson recommended.
	In setting up a new framework it is important to retain and build on the strengths of the current system. These include the effective protection of public health in partnership with the Food Standards Agency and the Department of Health; the partnership working with industry already developed, for example in tackling bluetongue; the veterinary and scientific expertise in Defra and its agencies; and the delivery capability of the Animal Health Executive Agency, as well as close co-operation with the devolved Administrations.
	The fundamental changes proposed will require primary legislation. In the light of responses to this consultation the Government intend to prepare a draft Bill for consultation and scrutiny.
	The consultation document sets out our proposals in greater detail and is accompanied by a partial impact assessment. But there is much still to be decided. Views and comments are invited to help develop these ahead of draft legislation.
	These proposals should establish a governance and funding structure for tackling animal diseases that helps to reduce the risks and costs, creates confidence in the policies decided and ensures those who benefit share the costs with taxpayers.
	This consultation concerns England although it is proposed that the new organisation will take on the UK and GB responsibilities currently undertaken by Defra. I intend to continue discussions with ministerial colleagues in other parts of the UK to ensure continued co-operation and co-ordination on animal disease policies.

Aviation: Royal and Ministerial Air Travel

Baroness Taylor of Bolton: My right honourable friend the Minister of State for the Armed Forces (Bob Ainsworth) has made the following Written Ministerial Statement.
	Further to the Written Ministerial Statement on Royal and Ministerial Air Transport laid by my honourable friend the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport on the 26 March 2008 (WS 11-12), work has been carried out to explore solutions for non-scheduled and dedicated flights to support the Queen and members of the Royal Family in their official duties. Pending the finalisation of this work the Ministry of Defence has agreed that 32 (The Royal) Squadron will provide continued support to the Royal Family until 1 April 2010.

Colombia

Lord Malloch-Brown: My right honourable friend the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (David Miliband) has made the following Written Ministerial Statement.
	The UK Government's work in Colombia makes a significant and positive impact. To make it more effective and relevant, we are changing the way we deliver our objectives. I wish to inform the House of these changes.
	Colombia's strengths and progress over recent years are being undermined by continuing problems of abuse of human rights, poverty and inequality, impunity and the drugs trade. The Colombian people do not want conflict. Illegal armed, terrorist and guerrilla groups continue to kill and abuse, and have no place in a democratic society. We support the Colombian Government's determination to tackle these groups in accordance with international humanitarian law, including addressing the drugs trade that causes significant health, social and environmental harm to both of our countries.
	Our policy needs to take full account of these challenges. We have therefore reviewed and are reprioritising what we are doing in Colombia. The changes we are making will give new focus to the UK's contribution to peace, prosperity and justice for Colombia's people, to the mutual benefit of both our countries.
	Counternarcotics
	We will continue our important counternarcotics work in Colombia, including supporting projects totalling over £900,000 of the UN Office of Drugs and Crime in Bogota. Our capacity building work in Colombia is helping to bring down trafficking networks, put those involved in jail, seize cocaine destined for the UK, disrupt traffickers' financing networks, and seize the proceeds of their crimes. It is vital that we continue it.
	Impunity
	We will make tackling impunity a priority, and have allocated £250,000 next financial year for projects in this area implemented by the UK and other partners. Too many people in Colombia commit crimes without fear of justice or punishment, and our work will aim to help the Colombian criminal justice system develop its ability to tackle impunity.
	Human rights and humanitarian demining engagement with the Colombian Armed Forces
	We have achieved our objective of helping the Colombian Government develop a road map to promote their military's adherence to international humanitarian law. The Government share the concerns of many in the House that there are officers and soldiers of the Colombian Armed Forces who have been involved in, or allowed, abuses. The challenge for the Colombian Government is to ensure the strategic human rights principles we have helped to promote are embedded and consistently practised by all members of their armed services. We will continue to offer our political, and, where possible, financial and practical support to UN projects that aim to help promote human rights adherence within the Colombian armed forces. Our bilateral human rights projects with the Colombian Ministry of Defence will cease.
	The UK's humanitarian demining training has contributed significantly to the removal of the landmines that kill and maim innocent Colombians. We now plan to integrate this work more fully with that of international governmental and non-governmental partners.
	Human rights and promoting civil society
	We will continue our work on strengthening human rights, promoting civil society and supporting human rights defenders. We support a large number of projects in areas such as freedom of speech, democracy and tackling discrimination. For example, we have recently supported a UN project to improve criminal prosecution of sexual crimes committed against women and girls, and we are working with journalists in Colombia to improve capacity for investigative journalism in conflict and peace issues. Projects already approved for the next financial year and beyond total almost £1 million, and a further £170,000 is to be allocated for human rights projects. With British trade union partners, we will continue to look at ways in which the UK can promote labour relations in Colombia. The Department for International Development's (DfID) Latin America partnership programme arrangement, worth £13 million per year for the region, will also focus on promoting more accountable public and political systems, HIV and AIDS, climate change and giving poor and marginalised people a greater voice. DfID also provides substantial contributions to the European Commission and international financial institutions' aid programmes in Colombia—in 2007-08 this totalled £3.1 million.
	Working with EU and other partners, we will continue to encourage a stronger relationship between the Colombian Government and civil society. Our staff in Colombia meet with many who have received threats, and will continue to do so.
	Our ongoing work in Colombia on other issues, including addressing climate change (where our regional projects that include Colombia total £900,000) and promoting trade and investment, will continue.

Community Infrastructure Fund

Baroness Andrews: My right honourable friend the Minister for Housing and Planning (Margaret Beckett) made the following Written Ministerial Statement on Friday, 27 March 2009.
	My honourable friend the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Paul Clark) and I are today announcing £170 million of capital support from the Community Infrastructure Fund for 29 transport projects in the growth areas and growth points that will help to unlock housing, and a further 26 projects that are being invited to submit full business cases for further consideration.
	The housing market is experiencing significant challenges as a result of turbulence in the global financial markets. The growth areas and growth points are playing a critical role in helping us to meet these challenges, with plans to build 35 per cent above previously planned levels. But if the infrastructure support for these new homes is not in place, their construction will be delayed when we need them most, hampering the economy's recovery. This means we need to be investing today in tomorrow's infrastructure. The long-term challenge to meet the housing needs of an ageing, growing population, while helping families and first-time buyers priced out of the property market, remains. The Government are committed to promoting the long-term stability of the housing market and meeting the long-term challenge of increasing housing supply.
	The Community Infrastructure Fund is one of Government's key mechanisms for supporting housing growth. As a joint Communities and Local Government and Department for Transport fund, it is designed to specifically support small and medium-scale transport schemes that unlock housing growth; £100 million has already been allocated to 13 schemes in the Thames Gateway. A further £200 million has been ringfenced to support the growth areas and growth points over the CSR07 period.
	Today's announcement allocates £170 million of this for 29 transport schemes in the growth areas and growth points that will support the delivery in housing growth over the next two years. The list projects include:
	new public transport facilities, such as the new south-east Hampshire bus rapid transit scheme;new road and junction improvements, such as the improvements to the Southgate area of King's Lynn which will support the development of 900 new homes;innovative transport solutions that will ensure smoother traffic flows and reduced congestion such as the A14 ramp metering scheme in Kettering and the urban traffic management scheme in Aylesbury; andschemes to improve sustainability, such as the Wichestowe pedestrian and cycle bridge which will provide a sustainable means for the new development at Wichelstowe to access the town centre in Swindon.
	Another 26 schemes from the second round growth points have been shortlisted to submit full business cases for consideration for a further £30 million from the Community Infrastructure Fund together with any remaining funding from the first round. This includes projects to provide a new rail station at Chorley, new cycling facilities at Ellesmere Port and road improvements to service high frequency bus services in Newcastle.
	The Community Infrastructure Fund is being managed on behalf of the Government by the Homes and Communities Agency. This funding is in addition to the £833 million already provided to the growth areas and growth points from the growth fund over the CSR07 period.
	Further details of the schemes that have been allocated funding have been placed in the Library of the House.

Court and Tribunal Costs

Lord Myners: My right honourable friend the Financial Secretary to the Treasury (Stephen Timms) has made the following Written Ministerial Statement.
	The policy of the Inland Revenue and HM Customs and Excise on coming to arrangements about costs (in the context of High Court cases) was set out on 12 March 1980 by Mr Peter Rees (then Minister of State at the Treasury).
	This Statement updates that policy in relation to cases which will be considered in the tax chamber of the first-tier tribunal, or the finance and tax chamber of the upper tribunal, after 1 April 2009 following the changes made under the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007.
	The general rule in the appeal courts is that the losing party risks having to pay the other side's costs, and I do not think it would be right to treat tax cases differently as a matter of course.
	However, HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) exercise their discretion and are willing in appropriate circumstances, and in particular where it is they who are appealing against an adverse decision, to consider waiving any claim to costs in cases before the upper tribunal or the appeal courts, or to consider making other arrangements (this may also extend to cases before the first-tier tribunal).
	In the minority of cases categorised as complex, where costs can be awarded in the tax chamber of the first-tier tribunal other than for unreasonable behaviour, the appellant can ensure that there is no risk of them bearing HMRC's costs by opting for the costs rules not to apply.
	In considering the exercise of HMRC's discretion, influential factors include the risk of financial hardship to the other party, the involvement of a point of law the clarification of which would be of significant benefit to taxpayers as a whole and the efficient collection and management of revenue for which HMRC have responsibility.
	If HMRC are to come to an arrangement of this nature, they would expect to do so in advance of the hearing and following an approach by the taxpayer involved.

Courts Service: Key Performance Indicators

Lord Bach: My honourable friend the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State (Bridget Prentice) has made the following Written Ministerial Statement.
	The following list of key performance indicators has been set for Her Majesty's Courts Service for 2009-10.
	To commence 78 per cent of cases within the following time scales in the Crown court:
	defendants' cases that are sent for trial within 26 weeks of sending;defendants' committal for trial cases within 16 weeks of committal;appeals within 14 weeks of the appeal being lodged; andcommittals for sentence within 10 weeks of committal.
	To speed up criminal cases in the magistrates courts so that, for charged cases, the average time from charge to disposal is less than six weeks.
	Time taken to produce and send court results to the police:
	95 per cent of court registers produced and despatched within three working days; and100 per cent of court registers produced and despatched within six working days.
	To achieve an 85 per cent payment rate for financial penalties in the magistrates' courts.
	For 60 per cent of all breached community penalties to be resolved within 25 working days of the relevant failure to comply.
	To increase the proportion of defended small claims that are completed otherwise than by court hearing to 65 per cent.
	To increase the proportion of defended small claims that are completed (from receipt to final hearing) within 30 weeks to at least 70 per cent.
	To increase the amount of civil work initiated online—65 per cent of eligible possession claims through PCOL and 75 per cent of specified money claims through MCOL and via the Claims Production Centre.
	To ensure that 48 per cent of care and supervision cases in the county court and 56 per cent in the magistrates' court are completed within 40 weeks.
	To maintain the "very satisfied" element of the HMCS court user satisfaction survey at or above the 2007-08 baseline of 41 per cent.
	More information on these and other key supporting targets are published in the HM Courts Service business plan for 2009-10. Copies of the business plan for 2009-10 have been placed in the Libraries of both Houses. Copies are also available in the Vote Office and the Printed Paper Office.

Health: Adult Social Care

Lord Darzi of Denham: My honourable friend the Minister of State, Department of Health (Ben Bradshaw) has made the following Written Ministerial Statement.
	Today I am publishing a consultation document, which is the latest stage in the development of the new system we are introducing for the regulation of health and adult social care.
	The publication, Response to Consultation on the Framework forthe Registration of Health and Adult Social Care Providers and Consultation on Draft Regulations sets out our response to our previous consultation, The Future Regulation of Health and Adult Social Care in England: A Consultation on the Framework for the Regulation of Health and Adult Social Care. It describes the new registration framework for the new Care Quality Commission, to be introduced from April 2010. It also launches a new consultation on the content of the draft regulations.
	From 1 April 2009, the Care Quality Commission will take over from the Healthcare Commission, the Commission for Social Care Inspection and the Mental Health Act Commission.
	For 2009-10, the new commission will continue to regulate adult social care and private and voluntary healthcare under the terms of the Care Standards Act 2000. Also in 2009-10, it will regulate National Health Service providers against regulations made under the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (the 2008 Act) relating to healthcare-associated infections, which were recently approved by Parliament.
	From April 2010, the commission will operate a new registration system based on regulations to be made under the 2008 Act. It is the content of these regulations we are now consulting on.
	The draft regulations set out who needs to register with the new commission (scope of registration) and what they need to do to register and remain registered (registration requirements).
	The new approach will mean that patients and people using services will have the same level of assurance of the quality and safety of their care and treatment, whether it is being provided by the NHS, local government or the independent sector.
	The registration requirements are designed to address the concerns of people using health and adult social care services, covering the topics on which they want assurance. They provide clarity about the essential levels of safety and quality all providers must deliver for people who use their services, without being prescriptive about how providers run their services.
	The registration system will operate alongside a wider quality improvement framework that encourages not just good care but excellent care. The commission will have a role in contributing to ongoing quality improvement as part of the wider quality framework, particularly through its publication of comparable information in periodic reviews, and its power to conduct special reviews into areas of particular interest.
	Regulation plays a vital role within the Government's drive to make quality the organising principle of care. High Quality Care For All set out that vision for the NHS, but the underpinning ambition and principles apply equally across all forms of health and adult social care. The White Paper Our Health, Our Care, Our Say: A New Direction For Community Services (January 2006), which is available in the Library, described the framework that is now used for promoting quality in adult social care services and set out the seven key outcomes that adult social care should deliver.
	This publication will be of interest to anyone providing or working in health and adult social care, and to patients and people using services, who are interested in how the reforms are going to improve these services.
	Today's publication has been placed in the Library and copies are available to honourable Members from the Vote Office.

Legal Aid

Lord Bach: My honourable friend the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State (Shahid Malik) has made the following Written Ministerial Statement.
	The Legal Services Commission (LSC) has today published a consultation on best value tendering (BVT) of criminal legal aid services. This follows an initial LSC consultation published in December 2007 which set out the principles of how a market-based approach could be introduced for the procurement of criminal defence services, together with some broad design issues. This second consultation paper sets out a detailed model for the introduction of best value tendering (BVT) for police station and magistrates' court work. It describes plans to pilot BVT in two criminal justice system areas (Greater Manchester and Avon and Somerset) from autumn 2009. Following a review of the pilot, the intention is to roll out BVT across England and Wales on a phased basis during 2010 and 2011.
	The proposed model takes as its starting point the recommendations of Lord Carter of Coles' review of legal aid procurement which identified the need for fundamental reform in the way legal services are procured. His report, published in 2006, recommended a market-based approach that defined best value in terms of quality, capacity and price. The Government accepted these recommendations and committed to the implementation of a quality-assured tendering process.
	The proposed reforms aim to secure long-term sustainability for criminal defence services by allocating work to those providers who meet the required quality standards and offer best value for money. BVT will enable solicitors' firms to offer their services at a price which they know is sustainable for them and reflects the costs of provision in their local area. It also offers firms of all sizes the opportunity to secure the volume of work that best suits their business model, and to expand should they wish to do so. The BVT proposals affect work undertaken at the police station and magistrates' court only; any move to introduce BVT in the Crown court would be subject to a further consultation.
	The consultation paper also describes the contracting process that will apply to firms wishing to undertake criminal defence work outside of the BVT pilot areas from July 2010.
	The 12-week consultation closes on 19 June 2009. Copies of 2010 Contracts and Best Value Tendering: a Consultation have been placed in the Libraries of both Houses, the Vote Office and the Printed Paper Office. The document can be downloaded from the consultation section of the LSC's website at www.legalservices.gov.uk.

NATO: Defence Ministerial Meetings

Baroness Taylor of Bolton: My right honourable friend the Secretary of State for Defence (John Hutton) has made the following Written Ministerial Statement.
	I attended an informal meeting of NATO Defence Ministers in Krakow, Poland on 19 and 20 February. It was in many ways a preparatory meeting for the NATO summit to be held in Strasbourg and Kehl next month. Ministers considered the progress being made on NATO's wide-ranging transformation agenda, including the UK/French helicopter initiative, reforms to NATO's command structures, ways of improving the way the headquarters in Brussels does its business, and work to make the NATO Response Force more sustainable. In the context of the latter, I introduced a proposal for a rapidly deployable Alliance Solidarity Force for collective defence. This proposal will now be taken forward in the wider work on the NATO Response Force.
	There were two sessions on operations: one as allies, and a wider discussion on Afghanistan with International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) contributing nations, Kai Eide (the UN Secretary-General's Special Representative) and General Wardak (the Afghan Defence Minister). Ministers welcomed the US announcement of increased force contributions to ISAF, reviewed ISAF's expanded role in counternarcotics, and agreed the need for a civil surge to accelerate development activities, and support for the Afghan Government. Ministers also welcomed agreement that another Standing NATO Maritime Group will contribute in the coming months to the wider international efforts to fight piracy off the coast of Somalia.
	Krakow concluded with meetings of the NATO-Ukraine Commission and the NATO-Georgia Commission, in which Defence Ministers were updated on Ukraine's and Georgia's progress against their annual national plans.

Prisons: Deaths in Custody

Lord Bach: My honourable friend the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State (Shahid Malik) has made the following Written Ministerial Statement.
	The Forum for Preventing Deaths in Custody today publishes its final annual report. The forum has been independently chaired, and its policy positions have not always coincided with government policy. I nevertheless welcome this report.
	Every death in custody is a personal tragedy for those left behind and I recognise that the numbers are still too high. Bringing about a reduction in the number of deaths in custody remains a priority for the Government, and that is why, in July 2008, my honourable friend the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State (Maria Eagle) announced a radical overhaul of the machinery for dealing with this important issue, following an independent review (Official Report, Commons, 21/7/08; col. 75WS). The new Ministerial Council on Deaths in Custody that was announced by my honourable friend will commence work in April 2009. I believe it will build on the good work of the Forum for Preventing Deaths in Custody, and will further contribute to our learning from deaths in custody across all custodial settings.
	I also take this opportunity to record my gratitude to the forum's outgoing chair, John Wadham. Mr Wadham was heavily involved in the forum's inception in 2005, and he has chaired it since that time, latterly in a voluntary capacity. I believe he has made a significant contribution to the objective of ensuring the safety of those held in state custody, and to the solid foundations the forum has laid for the future.
	Copies of the 2007-08 annual report of the Forum for Preventing Deaths in Custody will be placed in the Libraries of both Houses. Copies are available from the forum's website at www.preventingcustodydeaths.org.uk.

Town and Country Planning (Consultation) (England) Direction 2009

Baroness Andrews: My honourable friend the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State (Iain Wright) has made the following Written Ministerial Statement.
	I am today publishing the Town and Country Planning (Consultation) (England) Direction 2009, appended to Circular 02/09. Copies have been placed in the Library of the House.
	This direction, which comes into force on 20 April 2009, will require local planning authorities in England to consult the Secretary of State before granting planning permission for certain types of development for which they are minded to grant permission. It replaces all such existing directions, which are cancelled; and makes changes to the terms of some of them in the light of the consultation exercise undertaken during 2008 as explained in the accompanying Government response.
	In line with the commitment given in the planning White Paper in 2007, the changes will streamline the planning policy framework and give local planning authorities greater freedom in deciding their own planning applications. The changes also accord with the Killian Pretty recommendation to make the policy framework simpler and more user-friendly.
	The new direction introduces a new requirement for local planning authorities to refer applications in circumstances where English Heritage is sustaining an objection on the grounds that a proposed development could have an adverse impact on the outstanding universal value, integrity, authenticity and significance of a World Heritage Site or its setting.
	Additionally, the shopping direction is cancelled without replacement, as are the three elements of the current departures direction relating to housing; land belonging to the local planning authority; and "any other development which would ... significantly prejudice the implementation of the development plan's policies and proposals". The current requirement to refer departures from the development plan which relate to proposals for more than 5,000 square metres of gross retail, leisure, office or mixed commercial floor space is extended to apply additionally to proposals for increases of existing floor space of over 2,500 square metres, where the total would then exceed 5,000 square metres. However, it will only apply to proposals on sites in edge or out of centre locations.
	This new direction will not affect the Secretary of State's power under Section 77 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 to direct that any particular planning application should be called in for her own determination irrespective of whether it falls within the terms of this direction. It will still be open to anyone to request that any application be considered for "call in".
	The direction, the accompanying impact assessment and the Government's response to the consultation paper are available on the CLG website at www.communities.gov.uk/corporate/publications/consultations/.
	At the same time, Communities and Local Government is cancelling a number of other planning circulars and other guidance documents which have become obsolete but have never been formally withdrawn. The details of the cancelled documents are available on the CLG website.

UK Atomic Energy Authority Limited

Lord Mandelson: We are announcing today the commencement of a sale process to dispose of 100 per cent of UKAEA Limited (offers will also be accepted for a partial offer), the commercial operations of the UK Atomic Energy Authority (UKAEA). The process will take the form of two stages, an initial stage which will allow bidders access to an information memorandum document written by Greenhill and Co and request first round bids. Following this, a second stage will allow a smaller number of interested parties access to detailed due diligence and put forward a further more detailed bid. It is the intention for HMG to complete the transaction prior to the Summer Recess.
	The sale is the next step in the development of the commercial business of UKAEA Limited, which was first approved by Ministers in 2005. The sale is recognition of the work done by management in creating a commercially viable enterprise that has become an important repository of key nuclear skills that will help ensure that the UK will remain at the forefront of the nuclear services industry.
	UKAEA Limited principally undertakes nuclear decommissioning work under contract for NDA owned sites in the UK (Dounreay and Harwell/Winfrith). The business also has a fledgling consulting services business within the nuclear decommissioning sector under which it operates tier 2 and tier 3 smaller scale contracts for both the NDA and other owners.
	The principal site of operation for UKAEA Limited is Dounreay, located in the north-east of Scotland. The business also contains a pensions administration business which administers the pensions of several nuclear industry public sector operators.
	The business plan of UKAEA Limited aims to grow revenues by principally growing the consulting services provided by the business. Within the UK and internationally there are a significant number of old nuclear facilities for which decommissioning services will be required.
	UKAEA Limited's key decommissioning site at Dounreay will be completed in the next two years. The Government would like UKAEA Limited to be in a position to enter the competition with clarity and stability over the business's ownership.
	This sale underlines the importance attached to the clean-up of nuclear waste. It will increase efficiency, competition and value for money for the taxpayer in the decommissioning and clean up work of old nuclear power stations.